Currently I am publishing a new version of my NPM package every time I push changes to the GIT repository. Most of my changes are just silly patches. I use NPM as a tool that enables versioning and code reuse across many of my projects. I am already over some v0.0.173 after a month of work. Is this safe to keep publishing stuff at the same pace? Are there any gudelines or anything that regulates how often a package can be published? I don't want to get banned just because I didn't know the rules.
1
-
See here: stackoverflow.com/questions/13507763/… The question and answer seem to suggest, yes that you can publish very often.Rivasa– Rivasa2015-12-21 01:54:51 +00:00Commented Dec 21, 2015 at 1:54
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
I don't want to get banned just because I didn't know the rules.
You can find a code of conduct on npmjs.com. Squatting is forbidden (reserve a name by publishing an empty package), packages must not contain illegal or infringing content, packages must not be malware, etc. but there is no restriction on how often a package can be published.
Here is an excerpt:
The Service administrators reserve the right to make judgment calls about what is and isn't appropriate in published packages. These are guidelines to help you be successful in our community.
Packages published to the Service must be created using the npm command-line client, or a functionally equivalent implementation. For example, a "package" must not be a PNG or JPEG image, movie file, or text document. Using the Service as a personal general-purpose database is also not allowed for this reason. Packages should be npm packages, and nothing else.
Packages must contain some functionality. "Squatting", that is, publishing an empty package to "reserve" a name, is not allowed.
Packages must not contain illegal or infringing content. You should only publish packages or other materials to the Service if you have the right to do so. This includes complying with all software license agreements or other intellectual property restrictions. For example, redistributing an MIT-licensed module with the copyright notice removed, would not be allowed. You will be responsible for any violation of laws or others’ intellectual property rights.
Packages must not be malware. For example, a package which is designed to maliciously exploit or damage computer systems, is not allowed. However, an explicitly documented penetration testing library designed to be used for white-hat security research would most likely be fine.
Package name, description, and other visible metadata must not include abusive, inappropriate, or harassing content.
